The High Court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition challenging the cancellation of office bearers for 2018-2019 and direction for fresh elections. The court held the petition was misconceived as the petitioner could have informed authorities of his non-involvement earlier.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9799 of 2020
Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akash Khare,Hari Om Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Petitioner is aggrieved by two orders dated 27.2.2020 and 19.3.2020 passed by the Deputy Registrar Firms, Societies and Chits whereby the list of office bearers registered earlier for the year 2018-2019 has been cancelled and fresh elections have been directed to be conducted under Section 25(2) of the Society Registration Act. This order is assailed primarily on the ground that though petitioner was shown as Manager in the earlier terms but he has no concern whatsoever with the society and his name has been misused. It is also submitted that the petitioner is being included in the election process without his consent by ignoring the request made to expunge his name.
Petition is opposed by learned Standing counsel.
Considering the nature of order proposed to be passed notices need not be issued to private respondent nos. 4 and 5 and the writ petition is being disposed of after hearing the learned Standing counsel.
Orders impugned in the writ petition merely hold that the list of members registered for the year 2018-2019 is invalid and a fresh election is to be conducted by the Assistant Registrar. In view of the fact that petitioner asserts that he has no concern with the society this Court is at a loss to understand as to what prejudice would be cost to petitioner if the list of office bearers is cancelled for the year 2018-2019 and fresh elections are directed to be held under Section 25(2) of the Act. It will always be open for the petitioner to apprise the Deputy Registrar that he has no concern with the society and that his name be not included in the list of members of the society. In the event petitioner finds that his name has been misused for payment of salary etc. he can always lodge an appropriate police report but that alone would not give him any right to challenge the orders of the Deputy Registrar if he proceed to hold election under Section 25(2) of the Act. Writ petition is apparently misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 8.7.2020 Abhishek Singh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petitioner aggrieved by cancellation of office bearers list and fresh election direction has locus standi when he claims no concern with the society.
Whether misuse of petitioner's name in a society list provides a right to challenge orders directing fresh elections.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ashok Kumar
State Of U P
Ashwani Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
